High Court allowed second bail application of Jay Brajesh in a case of culpable homicide and causing danger to life. Court framed strict bail conditions, fixed a one-year timeline for trial conclusion, and directed Trial Court to ensure speedy disposal.
Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:154465
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10054 of 2023
Applicant :- Jay Brajesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ravesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation then the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the Trial Court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 2.8.2023 Rohit
Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail under the given circumstances.
Whether the High Court should direct speedy trial after granting bail.
Whether bail conditions can be framed to ensure appearance and prevent witness tampering.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I.Referred¶12
Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
Jay Brajesh
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
